Patna High Court

Chandan Kumar @ Nikhil RajversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 April 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and surety conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Chandan Kumar, filed an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in a case (Fenhara P.S. Case No. 208 of 2025) involving multiple offences under the BNS. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner assaulted the informant’s son with a fighter, causing injuries. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the medical report showed only minor abrasions and that pain is not an injury, thus the allegations do not match the evidence. The State opposed bail. After hearing both sides, the court decided to grant bail, directing the petitioner to surrender within four weeks and to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in view of the alleged offences.
Whether the injuries alleged by the prosecution are sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 482(2) of the CrPC are satisfied.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
assault
injury
Section 482
Criminal Procedure Code
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18768 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-208 Year-2025 Thana- PHENHARA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Chandan Kumar @ Nikhil Raj Son of Ramadhar Yadav @ Ramadhar Rai
                 Resident of Village- Govindbara, PS- Fenhara, Dist- East Champaran
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been

                   filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with

                   Fenhara P.S. Case No. 208 of 2025 instituted for the offence under

                   Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 329(3), 109, 308(2), 352,

                   351(1) and 3(5) of the BNS.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner has assaulted with fighter on the chest of the

                   informant’s son.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

                   from perusal of the order of the learned trial court it will transpire

                   that learned trial court has recorded that injured Gulshan Tiwari

                   has sustained abrasion of 1” on left eyebrow, pain on chest, pain

                   on back and bodyache. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

                   submitted that there is allegation that the petitioner has assaulted

                   with fighter on the chest whereas the abrasion is found on the left
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18768 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      eye-brow of the informant. As far as pain is concerned, pain is not

                      an injury, it is just a feeling of the person. Learned counsel for the

                      petitioner has submitted that the injury sustained by the petitioner

                      does not co-relate with the allegations.

                                   5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

                      the bail of the petitioner.

                                   6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in

                      the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court

                      is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is

                      directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four

                      weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender in

                      connection with Fenhara P.S. Case No. 208 of 2025, he will be

                      enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees

                      ten thousand) each of them with two sureties of the like amount

                      each to the satisfaction of learned court of JMFC, East

                      Champaran, Motihari subject to the conditions as laid down under

                      Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                                   7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands

                      allowed.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…